High Court Karnataka High Court

Siddappa S/O Basappa Hubballi vs Shankargouda S/O Kallangouda … on 10 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Siddappa S/O Basappa Hubballi vs Shankargouda S/O Kallangouda … on 10 September, 2008
Author: Anand Byrareddy
WP30709.G8

H! mm man warm or xaruurmxa
cmcurr mncn AT nmmwnn %

DATED 11113 THE 10?! mm or 3EPTEIfl;£;'!*;i§,:  

'rm: Hownm  

 

war: m2:'m'1ox¢ x0...3o'}o9[1%'3i)osJ.£W..;4<':I*c1'=--'.A"'» 1'  ,
new -  _ V _ 'V  ..

1. siddappa,  - 
S/o Basappa Hubiva}];'_,  V. " '
Aged about59yea1*s,' ' . 1  
00ct1patiaz1=AsIi9a_Huhb_aifi.'  
1'  aiaqut  years,
V1.V_Occupati:3tz:Aggi¢ultL=m,'
Residing at  'A % 
'I'9;h.41kVHuh1i. » 

st _;f 'T smnmaxiisgjigesswa,
..  ggwii ~13 ABasappa'"HubhaHi,
2\..ge:_t1'a}:xo11t 74 years,

V' "  _ " O_¢(%1ipaiion:Agx:icu1ture,

"'Re$idi1§;g&2t Raynal,
Taiuk Hubii. ... PE'l'I'1'!ONER8

tn}  cam, Adv)

-----...u.a.«m

 "   Shankargouda,



WP3(}709G8

S] o Kallangouda ?atil,
Aged about 58 years,
C)ccupafion:Agr§cu1turc,
Residing at Tarihal,
Taluk Huhli.

2. Mallangouda,

S/0 Kallangouda Patil,   
Aged about 58 years, I
Occupationzayiculturc,

Residing at Talihal,

Taluk Hubli.

3. The Special {and Acquisifigazg  ~ « 
National Highw:ay.No.4,'V "    H H
Dharwad.     V  , wmsmnnmwrs

(nymc.n.Hu.!_apur. gr...-:~§. far v_iai';g_,'; ~ 

8riK.B ..Qu1h;fiapal:', G§A._,i?ar..R3§,j_V-. 2 V 

Thi,s"p¢tifio-zgis "1Tfl:¢i'~.1_zfi~;1é2§ Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constimtiqn gf Ié:1dia"v.L_'pr'ayingj. to quashing the order
dt.18v.8~.--200£% a1iOWigng.IA..Ne.liIwi:1"RA No.79 of 2003 65 rejecting
IA Nao.IV   K Add}. District Judge, Dharwad
sitting aiz Hubli,  etc.,

Tfiis   on for preliminary hearing. this day,
thgcourt madcVfi1c fcpllowing:

' .....  

 _   counsel for the petitioners.

2. ~.  "'I;';_,'x1§ petitioners claim as tenants of the land comprised in

 »  sum No.'76:3B of Raynal, Taluka Hnbli. It is contended that

 thé: part of the land was acquired for the purposes of formation



WP307{)9.08

the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), to recover the
amount. The Land Acquisition Officer is said to havcfzegosimd

the amount awarded. The petitioners filed an .for

disbursement of the amount. At that stage,  1' 

2 filed objections to the same.   

stated to have filed W.P.No.2O652,a(bcfotfeA.tbis" 
the meanwhile, respondente  1 halve 

oxiginal suit in o.s.1~;o;2§2/2995 £I:e_fi1c};f’me”‘:1 Add}. Civil
Judge (Senior Division); the pending writ
petition beating uhad directed the
while directing the
in deposit in a Nationalised
the amount would depend on the
result ‘tltestxit; was directed to expedite the

pe1gafliitg.suit. court accordingly passed judmcnt and

lZ4.1§)3.20O8 dimissiug the suit. The same has been

appeal befom the Appellate Court in

l§.A_,NoV¢_79,[§€l08. In the said appeal, the respondents 1 and 2

to have filed an application to restrain the petitioners

withdrawal’ g the amount deposited in court as a.foresa1d’ .

Z

WP30709.fl8

years, if the petitioners are deprived of the fiuits of the

judgment and decree, the petitioners would suffer hnxfiehip

and inconvenience and further that the amount

nationaiised bank hardly accrues any interest

the rate of interest that is provided b3fA’the«benks,

of time. It is submitted that if the momyagm einvesxteci

is capable of generating hlgh’ er’ Vt

are ready and Wiliing to _eecu1a’ity”toV~Ieeeive the
amount in deposit would
submit that no of tm/ade out by the
petitioners, “notwithstanding the
judgment and the same
is the »thei”a;)pe.n1. Permitting the petitioners
to the result in grave injustice and

therefogro it is where this Court ought to entertain

:.’j'”‘thc petition some ought to he rejected at the

V VV 5. strong contentions and given the facts and

” ‘A”«e:ii’::un::stenees, it is appmpxtiate that the matter be decided

gxpcditiouszy. Acconilingly, the Writ petition is disposed of

Wi”.5U’IU9.U!S
While directing the appellate court to expedite the disposal of

the appeal at an outer limit of six months from the date of

receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Jmf –